Edwards planned to announce his campaign was ending with his wife and three children at his side. Then he planned to work with Habitat for Humanity at the volunteer-fueled rebuilding project Musicians' Village, the adviser said.

With that, Edwards' campaign will end the way it began 13 months ago — with the candidate pitching in to rebuild lives in a city still ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. Edwards embraced New Orleans as a glaring symbol of what he described as a Washington that didn't hear the cries of the downtrodden.

I don't think his "life's work" of helping poor people will evaporate. Maybe like Jimmy Carter he can build organizations that do that without the political pressure. On a more selfish note, I hope he endorses Obama.

I'm just hoping he did this for the right reasons, like he saw the numbers on the wall and decided to let the top two duke it out and get out before anyone else "wasted" their Super Tuesday vote. That's my guess. I mainly hope his wife is OK.

Submitted by Toad In The Hole (not verified) on Wed, 2008/01/30 - 10:40am.

Edwards would have sliced and diced any Republican candidate in November, however, he was jaded by the nutty campaign from 2004 and was still viewed as a "rookie" within the morass of the national democratic party.

His role in a go forward mode will be interesting, as for his own political credibility he does not need to align himself with either Hillary or Obama, as the Democratic primary now is nothing but a battle for control of the democratic party, its finances, its leadership, and capture of the attention of Democratic loyalists.

The Democratic Primary has the loaded potential to be a complete meltdown of the party, primarily along racial and socio-economic lines, which Edward should want no part of, particularly if he is planning on doing something else politically.

Every time I put a bumper sticker on one of our cars, the candidate tanks. My Edwards sticker went on about three weeks ago, when it became painfully evident the Draft Bill Moyers movement wasn't going anywhere.

I thought it was me. Candidates should not accept money from me if they want to win.

(I also have a bunch of souvenir yard signs in the garage. The only winner in the bunch is Bredesen's. I was hoping to reuse my Kerry/Edwards sign and just cross out Kerry. I still have my Al Gore 2000 sign that stayed in the yard until the Bush v. Gore Supreme Court decision came down.)

Don't they have the Superbowl in New Orleans sometimes? Anyway, I wonder if Brittney will perform?

Kidding aside, this country has a lot of growing up left to do. I've always wondered about historical periods like the Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, the Renaissance, etc. I think we are either going to enter another of these time periods - or we're going 180 degrees the other way. Hope vs. 100 years in Iraq.

Damn. Now I wish he were the nominee. At least I too feel better about not voting in the Dem primary.

I understand he won't take the VP job, but it would help him advance in 4 or 8 years, I would think. His wife's health would probably keep that off the table, though, whether there's been any change in her health now or not.

I think he helped advance the progressive agenda in the Democratic Party better than Clinton or Obama. He was instrumental in advancing the policies and values of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. His populism was especially relevant now that the economy is starting to tank.

I'm an Obama supporter and I voted for him this week. But now's the time just to appreciate what Edwards has done for the party up to this point. The horserace stuff can wait a day or two.

I can't see him running for VP again. I can see him doing something in either an Obama or Clinton administration.

I think, personally, that it's smart for him not to make an endorsement. He's talked to the two leaders. They've each promised to include his cause in their campaign. He holds them to it and campaigns for them in the fall.

Personally, I'm very sad. I've tried to vote for him twice now, and he's pulled out before the primary in both situations. I'm waiting to vote on Tuesday, because I like the day-of experience.

There are compelling reasons to vote for either Clinton or Obama. I've leaned toward one or the other in recent weeks, but I'd always gone back to Edwards. I may decide as I'm walking to the polling place on Tuesday.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

I noticed he said he "suspended" his campaign. Someone on the news channel said that meant he is still holding his delegates and that he could have people vote for him if they still wanted. I don't know if this is true or not, but that's interesting because a few devoted Edwards people might just decide to do that.

He'd be a good fit for Attorney General. Piss a lot of people off anyway and start undoing some damage. Anything Edwards does in the next few years will be done with an eye to another run for the White House and 'm not sure what that does for political prospects. Bobby Kennedy was making that move, but there was a lot more going on there. On the state level, Spitzer got to the governor's office on his AG record.

Not sure how much leeway a corporation-busting USAG would have. I suspect more under Obama than Clinton, but probably not nearly as much as he'd like.

Edwards saw the same numbers as Rudy. You can't sell third place to contributors and it takes money to campaign. He just couldn't hang on any longer.

Many Democrats were glad for the dollars Fred took out of Tenneseee. I guess Republicans should be glad for all the trial lawyer and union money Edwards took out of every state.

With Edwards and Rudy gone, the focus becomes much sharper on the frontrunners. It will be interesting to see how they respond to the increased pressure. McCain may be able to secure the nomination. I think the Democrats are headed for a fight in Denver.

It's impossible to compete against the money of the corporate world or the rich!

With the top 2% having 90% of the money, the poor and middle class have no chance of winning an election anymore. I think Edwards must have realized this and decided, what's the point.

Huh? Edwards has vast personal wealth. He has huge trial lawyer and union money (did he have any rally without union organization?). Edwards realized his top 2% wouldn't give to a candidate who wasn't winning. I'm sure just as many poor and middle class are giving to all the candidates, just not in the same amounts.

It is a challenge for someone of modest means to compete for national office. I suppose the contrary view is that those who are left to beg for money will be forever beholden to those well-to-do folks who enable them to be elected. In the end, it's a choice of the person. I know rich people I would trust with my last dollar. I know poor people who I wouldn't trust with a quarter. It's not rich v. poor, white v. black or male v. female. It's the person that should matter. Can they make the right choices if elected.

You are speaking of Utopia, it would be nice but we live in the US. It's not so much rich v poor, but, filthy rich v, everyone else. I see nothing wrong with being rich or with corporations, but there needs to be a balance of control and we no longer have that.

Good one. You are typical of those who threw all their weight for George W. Bush, presumably--if we are to believe you--because you were convinced he was the right person (despite coming from such wealth and power that made it virtually impossible for someone of modest means to run against him). You couldn't have been more wrong about him, and a lot of us won't let anyone forget how you and your party got him into office. Swiftboating, Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Enron, the "Brooks Brothers" riot, push polling, and too many other smears and dishonest tactics were your party's tools and these got funded largely by the most financially elite and the most powerful corporate lobbies.

The 2000 and 2004 campaigns weren't about Gore, Kerry, or Bush the individuals. They were no-holds barred power grabs for the guy the most powerful entities could best control.

As for Edwards, I think you would agree there's nothing wrong with him achieving wealth. But other similar wealthy people didn't share his values, so they didn't support him. The poor, even in numbers, can't compete with a few rich people with the loudest megaphones. And trial lawyer and union money together can't compete with corporate boardroom money, not even close.

I'm going to go vote this afternoon...and I'm still voting for Edwards. But I did that in 2000 with Bill Bradley, too. And in 2004 with Wes Clark. It's not like I have a stellar record in the primaries anyway...

*I did vote for Clinton in 1996, but I don't think that should count against my otherwise perfect streak since he was an unopposed incumbent.

I will happily vote for Edwards and have no regrets about it. I will support whoever emerges from Denver with the nomination, but I want my vote to record that I think Edwards' ideas should be given merit in developing the platform.